[WriteLog] RITTY with Writelog

[Riho Bergmann, ES7AAZ]

Hi,

It would be interesting to know what settings are you using there for MMTY
to perform
test RITTY vs. MMTTY. I recommend to use FIR and BPF at least 128 taps.

P.S. as far I understand there is nothing got to do with MMTTY or any other
TNC
to highlight the callsigns.

Rgds,
de Riho, ES7AAZ.

----- Original Message -----
From: "FireBrick" <w9ol@billnjudy.com>
To: <writelog@contesting.com>; "Dave Hachadorian" <k6ll@juno.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: [WriteLog] RITTY with Writelog


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Hachadorian" <k6ll@juno.com>
> To: <writelog@contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 4:19 AM
> Subject: [WriteLog] RITTY with Writelog
>
>
> > I noticed the comments below by W7TI on the 3830 Reflector,
> > and thought I would cross them over to Writelog for discussion.
> >
> > I used MMTTY in WL during the contest (K7ABC), and noticed
> > a similar delay in recognizing calls in a situation where copy was
> > difficult. I thought it was due to Writelog searching the
> > database and log files to match up calls on my relatively
> > slow computer. There were also some instances where a
> > clearly recognizable callsign, preceded by a DE, were not
> > highlighted, or took a couple of seconds to highlight.
> >
> > Anybody notice similar happenings, and is this normal, or do
> > I need a faster computer? I also noticed some hints in the
> > MMTTY help files to reduce computer loading, but didn't have
> > time to try them. Do they help?
> >
> > I thought MMTTY was a significant improvement over WL's native
> > decoder, but there were still some circumstances, backscatter
> > in particular, where it just would not copy, even though the signal
> > was loud. I wonder how RITTY stacks up against MMTTY?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> > Yuma, AZ
> > K6LL@juno.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:19:42 -0500 (EST) w7ti@dslextreme.com writes:
> > > For those who haven't used RiTTY by K6STI with WriteLog, you ought
> > > to give it a
> > > try.  The later versions have an algorithm which looks back at the
> > > previous
> > > characters and attempts to make sense out of the jumble by checking
> > > for shifted
> > > case, missing or flipped bits, etc.  Many times I saw where the call
> > > was not
> > > recognizable, and about a half second after the transmission
> > > stopped, up popped
> > > the call, correctly.  I'm not a programmer and I don't know what
> > > tricks Brian
> > > uses to make it happen, but it works.  Not 100%, but pretty close.
> > > The
> > > contester's friend.
> > >
> > > The usual disclaimers apply.  I count Brian as a friend, but have no
> > > financial
> > > interest.
>
> Funny you should ask.
> I played with having my Kam as a decoder in a second Rttyrite window on
the
> same computer but one of my multi monitor screens.
>
> I FREQUENTLY saw that the Kam would HIGHLIGHT a callsign more properly
than
> MMLTY.
> Both with a de or without preceeding the call.
> It also decoded the callsign more completely
> For instance MM would show W9OL/W9 with only W9OL highlighted while the
Kam
> window would show the entire callsign highlighted including the /W9.
> Another common instance:
> MM would show W9OLMW9OL and highlight the entire thing as one call where
as
> the ham would show it as W9OL W9OL, two seperate calls.
> I used a 'M' in my example as I saw that character a lot between two
> instances of a call.
> Now as the same signal was being sent to both the MMTTY and the KAM, I can
> only suspect that MMTTY was being fooled by noise the KAM didn't detect.
>
> Now I also used to perform the same test by sending the same signal into
> MMTTY and RITTY. Each program running on a seperate computer using
identical
> sound cards and the rigs output into a Y connector feeding both computers.
> both programs were running in their standalone versions and both computers
> were as near as identical as I could make them.
> You can't run RITTY and MMTTY off the same soundcards at the same time so
I
> couldn't do it on one computer.
> In this comparison, RITTY would beat out MMTTY marginally on most signals
> and significantly on fluttery or very weak signals.
>
> So far my attempts at getting RITTY to work under XP have been
unsuccesful.
> "-((
> But  I'm still playing at it.
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > WriteLog mailing list
> > WriteLog@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
>